GlockTalk Forum banner

101 - 120 of 197 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,020 Posts
It was a manufacturing ban, but it did not ban ownership or transfer. There is a difference.
Yeah the difference is about 6 months and $30k and probably a few hundred million firearms never made since they could not be sold commercially. Ya gotta love the Dems ability to get gun owners to argue with each other over what constitutes a "ban".

In some back room in 1986, Dems were contemplating the legislation. "I cant support a ban", one said. "Dont worry" said another. "We will grandfather a few existing ones, and even though it will take months and tens of thousands of dollars to get one, making them out of reach for 99.99% of the public, it will not technically be a ban", he said. "And best of all, some gun owners will defend it is as not a ban since a few will still be available". "Brilliant", he said.
 

·
Wolverine
Joined
·
9,349 Posts
[QUOTE="fg17, post: 30237593, member: 208410]
It’s not a stretch when you consider a single shot shotgun with a 12” barrel is an NFA item that takes a lot of time to acquire, but you can walk into a gun shop and buy a semi auto belt fed SAW in 20 minutes. Depends on the political climate I guess.
[/QUOTE]
I see your logic but that ignores why SBRs and SBSGs are in the NFA to begin with. Originally the intent was for pistols and revolvers to be NFA items. The cut downs were put on the list to avoid and end run to the pistol/revolver inclusion, which apparently wasn’t politically viable so they were left out. There’s really no logical reason for the inclusion of the short barrels but politically were easy to leave in the bill, so they were.

Like most gun laws they don’t make a lot of sense but we’re carped together out of political expediency at the time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,893 Posts
View attachment 908935
Cho abided by all of the Clinton Gun Crime Bill laws.
When he killed 32 and shot many more who survived.
He only used multiple 10 round magazines.
View attachment 908937
He voted Democrat too.
Multiple female students had complained to university honchos that Cho presented a threatening attitude towards them but VA Tech told them HIPPA and other privacy laws prevented the school from accessing his medical records or taking action to remove him from school.

Of course, "progressives" are unable to admit any unintended consequences responsibility for the very laws their captive Big Media apparatchiks help pressure legislators enact. As far as I know this scenario might possibly play out again in the future; and I fully expect Prog activists are awaiting the next horrific event to flood global networks with their push to deny whole populations the means to protect themselves from Stalin's offspring.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,404 Posts
[QUOTE="fg17, post: 30237593, member: 208410]
It’s not a stretch when you consider a single shot shotgun with a 12” barrel is an NFA item that takes a lot of time to acquire, but you can walk into a gun shop and buy a semi auto belt fed SAW in 20 minutes. Depends on the political climate I guess.
I see your logic but that ignores why SBRs and SBSGs are in the NFA to begin with. Originally the intent was for pistols and revolvers to be NFA items. The cut downs were put on the list to avoid and end run to the pistol/revolver inclusion, which apparently wasn’t politically viable so they were left out. There’s really no logical reason for the inclusion of the short barrels but politically were easy to leave in the bill, so they were.

Like most gun laws they don’t make a lot of sense but we’re carped together out of political expediency at the time.
[/QUOTE]
Yes, I'm aware of the history. Point being if that leap can be made I believe the one to semi auto rifles may be as well.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
689 Posts
Colombine dudes used AWB legal guns too I believe. IIRC the main culprit was a shotgun.

The major factor in nearly all the mass shootings has been time with unarmed victims, not weapon.

But of course we all here know that.
You nailed it !
Lots of time with unarmed victims trapped like sitting ducks.
Then mentally ill liberal Democrats protected by HIPPA privacy laws, can still pass FBI background checks, and buy guns anywhere they want.
Like Cho, the Virginia Tech shooter.
He was known as very mentally ill his whole life.
Then when he turned 18, they sealed his records.
So he could go to college, without anybody knowing his past.
Where he started stalking women, who complained to University authorities.
They threatened to expel him on the second offense.
Then he went on a killing spree !
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
689 Posts
Ditto for the Parkland University shooter Mr Cruz.
He had a rape list, and a kill list.
The university found out about it, and other things.
He was expelled from campus.
But once again, none of this could be reported to the police or FBI, because of the Liberal’s HIPPA and privacy laws.
So he was free to buy any guns he wanted.
Anywhere in the country.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,641 Posts
While not banned by definition, they're effective banned through pricing. Most can't afford them; for many others, it's not worth the price. I'd own a few if they were priced similar to semi-auto weapons! Heck, if there were little or zero difference in pricing, who wouldn't want select fire over semi-auto?

The same thing could happen through forced registration of "assault" weapons.
So, expensive and rare, but not banned.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,641 Posts
From the BATF website.

Prohibitions on Certain Types of Firearms
Federal firearms laws prohibit transactions in and possession of certain types of firearms. These include, for example:
  • Transfer or possession of a machinegun, 18 USC 922(o);
  • Manufacture, importation, sale, or possession of any firearm not detectable by airport security devices, 18 USC 922(p);
Obviously taken out of context, since it is a known fact that is is legal for qualified U.S. citizens to own machine guns, as long as they follow the rules and pay their tax.

Firearms that are not detectable by airport security devices are not necessarily "assault weapons", which is what started this discussion.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,641 Posts
View attachment 908935
Cho abided by all of the Clinton Gun Crime Bill laws.
When he killed 32 and shot many more who survived.
He only used multiple 10 round magazines.
View attachment 908937
He voted Democrat too.
Are we sure about that? He used a Walther .22 which used 10 round magazines, but he also had a Glock 19. Seems odd that a Glock back then would have been loaded with 10 round magazines.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,641 Posts
Yeah the difference is about 6 months and $30k and probably a few hundred million firearms never made since they could not be sold commercially. Ya gotta love the Dems ability to get gun owners to argue with each other over what constitutes a "ban".

In some back room in 1986, Dems were contemplating the legislation. "I cant support a ban", one said. "Dont worry" said another. "We will grandfather a few existing ones, and even though it will take months and tens of thousands of dollars to get one, making them out of reach for 99.99% of the public, it will not technically be a ban", he said. "And best of all, some gun owners will defend it is as not a ban since a few will still be available". "Brilliant", he said.
Who said anything about defending it or approving of it? Facts is facts, tho. A manufacturing ban is a lot different from a ban on ownership. I don't agree with either, but to argue there is no difference, is just silly.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
689 Posts
Are we sure about that? He used a Walther .22 which used 10 round magazines, but he also had a Glock 19. Seems odd that a Glock back then would have been loaded with 10 round magazines.
Clinton Gun Bill ended after 10 yrs by September 13, 2004.
So probably not.
April 6, 2007...
Cho, the Virginia Tech shooter had lots of extra loaded magazines put in the multiple pockets of his shooters vest.
So whether they were 10 rounders or 15 rounders would have made no difference.
909149

In 2012 newly re-elected President Obama & Biden tried to pass a Bill banning all semiautomatic Pistols & Rifles period !
That’s what Wayne La Pierre said on Fox News back then.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,300 Posts
I hope in 94, it seemed like everyone gave up.
From what I remember no one took it seriously. I was just starting out at that time I sure didn't take it seriously. Never thought that crap would actually pass sure enough media did a blitz on how the 2a was for hunters and they showed every sorry fud they could on tv saying they didn't use bayonet lugs for hunting and didn't use 30rd magazines for hunting. Next thing I knew it was passed.
I can imagine same propaganda being used again. Sure this time though they will throw in rails and probably require a komifornia bullet button mag release on all new productions SA.
For the people reading this and dont think it can happen. I thought the same thing in 94.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,548 Posts
95% chance all semi-auto rifles banned within the next 3 years. Will it hold up in Court? Once the Dems pack the Supreme Court with another couple leftist Justices (or a couple of conservative Justices pass away under mysterious circumstances) then, yes, it will.

So they might hold off on pushing it through this year, and wait until they have a Court which can be guaranteed to overturn Heller and gut the 2nd Amendment.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,240 Posts
Well, no. The NFA worked differently. The NFA didn't ban the manufacture of anything. Nor did it ban ownership.
Sure it did. Machine guns can only be manufactured for LE and Mil.

The NFA and 1994 CB are the same in that weapons made prior can be transferred and owned. Weapons made after cannot. The only difference is that a tax stamp is required for NFA items.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
214 Posts
I can’t see the demcritters getting rid of the filibuster. Sure, they make a lot of noise about it when it is used against them. But Dems have used and abused that same play to delay or influence what goes on just as often as the GOP have. It has been a useful tool for both parties.

Also remember that it is a dem senator that holds the record for the longest filibuster ever.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I agree. If the Filibuster is going to go they better be ready to fight an epic, divisive, scorched earth battle to set themselves up for permanent one party rule because Republicans can un-do anything they pass as easily as they can pass it. People keep forgetting, 50 plus 1 to pass would then mean 50 plus 1 to repeal. Nothing would past.

If/when the push for DC and PR statehood picks up steam that’s the clue that it’s time to worry because they’re putting the pieces in place to axe the filibuster and prevent doing so from hurting them later.
 
101 - 120 of 197 Posts
Top